Why You Can’t Trademark “US SPACE FORCE”—And What That Means for You


June 30, 2025

Hello Reader,

In May 2025, the Federal Circuit upheld the USPTO’s refusal to register the mark US SPACE FORCE—but not for the reason most people expect.

The issue wasn’t likelihood of confusion. It was something else: false suggestion of a connection.
This refusal falls under Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, which bars registration of any mark that falsely suggests a link with:

  • A person (living or dead)
  • An institution
  • A belief or
  • A national symbol

In this case, the court found that “US SPACE FORCE” falsely suggests a connection with the United States Government, and particularly with the newly formed sixth branch of the military.

Here’s what happened:

🔹 The applicant filed for the trademark just days after President Trump publicly announced the creation of the U.S. Space Force.

🔹 The Board found that the phrase “US SPACE FORCE” already pointed unmistakably to the federal government—even before the branch was officially formed.

🔹 The court emphasized that intent doesn’t matter—even if the applicant wasn’t deliberately trying to mislead, the public would still believe the name implied a government connection.

What This Means for You:

Don’t try to trademark government phrases, departments, or programs — Even if they seem clever, they likely violate Section 2(a).

Names that sound official can trigger refusals — If your proposed mark resembles something associated with a well-known institution, you may be seen as exploiting that association.

False connection ≠ consumer confusion — This type of refusal is about protecting the identity of institutions themselves, not just the buying public.

Timing doesn’t always help — Even though the trademark was filed early, the court held that the USPTO could still evaluate events that happened after the filing date—but before the final Board decision.

The Bottom Line:
A great trademark creates a strong identity—but if it borrows too closely from an existing one, especially a government entity, it could be rejected as a false connection.

Need help deciding if your brand name is distinctive—and registrable?

Let’s talk.

Keep Your Brand Safe and Protected,

J.J. Lee and the Trademark Lawyer Law Firm Team!

P.S. If your mark sounds like it belongs to a school, government office, celebrity, or public institution—you might be in 2(a) territory. Let’s review it together before the USPTO calls it out.

J.J. Lee, Trademark Attorney

Learn something new every Thursday! Join over 4,000 entrepreneurs and business owners for weekly Trademark tips, tricks, and news.

Read more from J.J. Lee, Trademark Attorney
a black and white photo of the supreme court

June 23, 2025 TMtelegram Hello Reader, A recent case before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) highlights a hard truth: you can lose a trademark dispute not because your argument is wrong—but because your paperwork is incomplete. In Superior Brands v. Retrobrands America, Superior tried to cancel a Supplemental Register trademark (KINNEY SHOES) based on a likelihood of confusion with their own intent-to-use application for a similar mark. Their argument? Their application was filed...

Someone is looking at a map of the united states.

June 16, 2025 TMtelegram Hello Reader, Think your trademark is safe because another business with a similar name is far away? Think again. Recent cases confirm that geographical distance no longer guarantees protection from trademark infringement claims. With online commerce bridging physical gaps, consumers can easily be confused—even across great distances. Always do a thorough nationwide trademark search before you settle on a brand name. And remember, federal registration of your...

a woman sitting on a bench holding a cell phone

June 9, 2025 TMtelegram Can you trademark a phrase everyone uses? Hello Reader, In a recent decision, the USPTO rejected Tinder’s applications to register “SWIPE LEFT” for its dating app and services. Why? Because “SWIPE LEFT” was found to be: ✅ Merely descriptive — It directly describes what users do in the app to reject a match.✅ Fails to function as a trademark — It’s a common phrase that conveys a familiar idea: rejection. Tinder submitted two consumer surveys trying to show people...